St Mungo's acknowledged the many problems raised by multiple residents and local businesses and that a great number of improvements are needed. An action plan has now been agreed with all stakeholders and a take stock meeting has been arranged in October.

Just to clear up any misunderstanding, this was not about gentrification / dehumanising homeless people / pushing homeless out of sight. The meeting was solely about the negative impact St Mungo's is having on Great Guildford Street and the area overall.

Whilst I appreciate the sentiment to be understanding and the cuts to public services, the negative impact includes: threats of violence to non St Mungo residents ( the police have multiple cases open), fighting in the street, arranging dogs to fight in the street, damage to private property, shouting/screaming outside our flats in the early hours of the morning, cans of alcohol littering the street and residents drinking on the street whilst sat on private property . All of the above are not one offs and St Mungo residents' behaviour have deteriorated over the last 3-4 months. Both St Mungo's management and residents need to take responsibility for this.

Please could I encourage those impacted to continue contact Neil's office (neil.coyle.mp@parliament.uk) which will help put pressure on St Mungo's to effect change and manage the situation appropriately, which they acknowledge is not currently being done.
For those not directly impacted, I appreciate your view but would encourage you also empathise with local businesses and residents for are impacted directly.

I do, no one should have to put up with that, I hope it gets sorted. Frankly, as sympathetic as I am to those less fortunate, I would go so far as to say, that if St Mungos can't get a grip with this, then they have to review their position. Or have the police admitted defeat? I have to assume that they are called during dog fights etc, (maybe that's the real issue here - with respect to local residents), where's the Old Bill?

I really want to go off on one about care in the community etc, I do though, understand that local residents just want local solutions.

Hi,
I've only just seen this thread, and therefore I'm a bit late to the party, however, I was wondering if St Mungos asks it's residents to sign anything agreeing to behave in a certain way? They must have rules, regarding drugs and alcohol etc, so surely they must have rules about unacceptable behaviour?

Residents do have to sign terms re: behaviour but St Mungos are reluctant to kick people out as this pushes the problem elsewhere in the Borough for the Council to deal with.

This St Mungos hostel is wet, so residents can go freely in/out with alcohol ( which they regularly do) and again the hostel is reluctant to change this as they state their cannot enforce/police this effectively

The enforcement of both items above I believe would make a big difference, along with a proactive approach from St Mungos management.

With this in mind, I am meeting with St Mungos and Neil Coyle's office on 17th Oct as the situation hasn't improved enough.

If you are negatively impacted by St Mungos, please contact Neil's office (neil.coyle.mp@parliament.uk) which will help put pressure on the hostel to change, take responsibility and manage the situation appropriately, which they acknowledge is not currently being done.

We need everyone affected to contact Neil so it is high on the agenda for St Mungos and the Council to resolve

I live opposite St Mungos and am all too aware of the antisocial behaviour that has been an ongoing problem for quite a while. I and other residents in my block have met with the manager of St Mungos on several occasions to discuss a solution, with mixed results.

Of course, it's unrealistic to expect no disturbances at all from a project like St Mungos, they're dealing with vulnerable people who aren't easy to manage. I should also say that as far as I can see, the vast majority of St Mungos residents are quietly going about their business, the problems seem to stem from a small minority. However, there are some basic steps that could be taken which would vastly improve the situation, but for whatever reason, the St Mungos staff simply aren't prepared/able to take them.

Terry, I would echo your point that this is not a gentrification vs homelessness issue, it's a case of people having the right to quiet enjoyment of their home and the poor management by St Mungos staff. Thanks for taking the lead on this, I've emailed Neil Coyle as suggested.

I also live in the area and I must admit that I do find it disappointing that a facility such as St Mungos, which could really change the lives of the residents who live there, is run so badly.

There appears to be no attempt to manage the facility effectively and consequently the residents who live there continue to be completely unaware of the surrounding environment believing it is reasonable to argue and shout offensive language in the early hours of the morning waking up neighbours and openly drinking and taking substances in the street, leaving the remains lying on the pavement. I'm sure if the facility was run more productively and a few changes were made, the local environment would be better for everyone. There appears to be a complete lack of engagement.

I will email Neil Coyle too to try and suggest some changes. I hope the meeting goes well.

Thanks Terry for taking this forward, I'm sure there are many residents like myself who completely agree with your comments and who would like to support in any way they can to make life better for everyone in the area.

Overall, I am pleased to say things have certainly improved but there is further progress to be made

Potentially Neil's office will be writing to local residents and businesses seeking their views - if this does happen, I would encourage their effected to respond. In the meantime please contact [email protected] and detail the issues / problems

In addition the Borough is currently undertaking a homeless strategy review, where our concerns will ( and recommendations e.g. ban dogs from the hostel, make the hostel alcohol/drug free ) be brought to the attention of the review - but we have been encouraged to write to the Council directly

We have agreed to meet every 6 weeks to ensure progress continues and things do not slip back to how they were - please post on this thread any issues you would like me to raise.

I wouldn't be able to agree with any move to ban dogs and dog owners. For a homeless person with a dog the relationship between them is likely one of the few meaningful emotional relationships in their life/current circumstance. It would be terrible to exclude, the majority of decent dog owners, from this service, due to the reprehensible actions of a few.